Search form

The Madness of Materialism

In January 1848, James Marshall was building a sawmill by a river near present day Sacramento when he found a piece of glowing metal on the floor, which turned out to be gold. Within a few weeks, once rumours of the discovery had spread, tens of thousands of people were flocking to the area, struck by ‘gold fever.' Ships were abandoned all over the California coast, businesses closed down, and whole towns became deserted. In a little over a year, San Francisco grew from shanty town of 79 buildings to a city of tens of thousands. Over the next few years, at least 300,000 gold seekers came to California.

The effect on the Native Americans of California was catastrophic. They were driven off their traditional hunting and gathering grounds, and their rivers were polluted by gravel, silt and toxic chemicals from the new mines. Some Indian groups used force to try to protect their lands, but were massacred by the miners. Those who weren't killed by the miners slowly starved to death, or died from diseases passed on by the immigrants. Others were kept as slaves, while attractive young women were carried off to be sold. As a result, the Californian Native American population fell from around 150,000 in 1845 to 30,000 in 1870.

This savage materialism was typical of European immigrants' attitude to the ‘New World' of America. They saw it as a treasure-house of resources to ransack, and saw the native population as an inconvenient obstacle to be eradicated.

Some tribes were so confused by the colonists' insatiable desire for gold that they believed that the metal must be a kind of deity with supernatural powers. Why else would they go to such lengths to get hold of it? When an Indian chief in Cuba learned that Spanish sailors were about to attack his island, he started to pray to a chest full of gold, appealing to the ‘gold spirit' which he believed they worshipped. But the ‘gold spirit' didn't show him any mercy - the sailors invaded the island, captured the chief and burned him alive.

Modern Materialism

In some ways the gold diggers' rampant materialism was understandable, since they were living at a time of great poverty, and for many of them gold digging seemed to offer an escape from starvation. But most of us in the western, industrialized world don't have that excuse. Our appetite for wealth and material goods isn't driven by hardship, but by our own inner discontent. We're convinced that we can buy our way to happiness, that wealth is the path to permanent fulfilment and well-being. We still measure ‘success' in terms of the quality and price of the material goods we can buy, or in the size of our salaries.

Our mad materialism would be more forgivable if there was evidence that material goods and wealth do lead to happiness. But all the evidence fails to show this. Study after study by psychologists has shown that there is no correlation between wealth and happiness. The only exception is in cases of real poverty, when extra income does relieve suffering and brings security. But once our basic material needs are satisfied, our level of income makes little difference to our level of happiness. Research has shown, for example, that extremely rich people such as billionaires are not significantly happier than people with an average income, and suffer from higher levels of depression. Researchers in positive psychology have concluded that true well-being does not come from wealth but from other factors such as good relationships, meaningful and challenging jobs or hobbies, and a sense of connection to something bigger than ourselves (such as a religion, a political or social cause, or a sense of mission).

Explanations for Materialism

Many economists and politicians believe that acquisitiveness - the impulse to buy and possess things - is natural to human beings. This seems to make sense in terms of Darwin's theory of evolution: since natural resources are limited, human beings have to compete over them, and try to claim as large a part of them as possible.

One of the problems with this theory is that there is actually nothing ‘natural' about the desire to accumulate wealth. In fact, this desire would have been disastrous for earlier human beings. For the vast majority of our time on this planet, human beings have lived as hunter-gatherers - small tribes who would usually move to a different site every few months. As we can see from modern hunter-gatherers, this way of life has to be non-materialistic, because people can't afford to be weighed down with unnecessary goods. Since they moved every few months, unnecessary goods would simply be a hindrance to them, making it more difficult for them to move.

Another theory is that the restlessness and constant wanting which fuels our materialism is a kind of evolutionary mechanism which keeps us in a state of alertness. (The psychologist Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi has suggested this, for example) Dissatisfaction keeps living beings on the look out for ways of improving their chances of survival; if they were satisfied they wouldn't be alert, and other creatures would take the advantage.

But there is no evidence that other animals live in a state of restless dissatisfaction. On the contrary, many animals seem to very slow and static lives, content to remain within their niche and to follow their instinctive patterns of behaviour. And if this is what drives our materialism, we would probably expect other animals to be acquisitive too. But again, there is no evidence that - apart from some food-hoarding for the winter months - other animals share our materialistic impulses. If it was necessary for living beings to be restless and constantly wanting then evolution would surely have ground to a half millions of years ago.

In my view, acquisitiveness is best understood in psychological terms. Our mad materialism is partly a reaction to inner discontent. As human beings' it's normally for us to experience an underlying ‘psychological discord', caused by the incessant chattering of our minds, which creates a disturbance inside us, and often triggers negative thoughts. Another source of ‘psychological discord' is the strong sense of separateness many of us feel, the sense of being isolated individuals living in a world which is ‘out there', on the other side of our heads.

We look to external things to try to alleviate our inner discontent. Materialism certainly can give us a kind of happiness - the temporary thrill of buying something new, and the ego-inflating thrill of owning it afterwards. And we use this kind of happiness to try to override - or compensate for - the fundamental unhappiness inside us.

In addition, our desire for wealth is a reaction to the sense of lack and vulnerability generated by our sense of separation. This generates a desire to makes ourselves more whole, more significant and powerful. We try to ‘bolster' our fragile egos and make ourselves feel more complete by accumulating wealth and possessions.

It doesn't work, of course - or at least, it only works for a very short time. The happiness of buying or owning a new item rarely lasts longer than a couple of days. The sense of ego-inflation generated by wealth or expensive possessions can be more enduring, but it's very fragile too. It depends on comparing yourself to other people who aren't as well off as you, and evaporates if you compare yourself to someone who is wealthier than you. And no matter how much we try to complete or bolster our ego, our inner discontent and incompleteness always re-emerges, generating new desires. No matter how much we get, it's never enough. As Buddhism teaches, desires are inexhaustible. The satisfaction of one desire just creates new desires, like a cell multiplying.

The only real way of alleviating this psychological discord is not by trying to escape it, but by trying to heal it - which will have to be subject of another blog.

Steve Taylor is a psychological lecturer and the author os several best-selling books on psychology and spirituality, including The Fall, Waking From Sleep and Out of the Darkness. Eckhart Tolle has described his work as 'an important contribution to the global shift in consciousness happening at the present time.' His website is www.stevenmtaylor.com

Placenta => The word placenta comes from the Latin word for cake. (Supply) Idiom: Take the cake (Demand)

take => vb takes, taking, took, taken (mainly tr)
1. (also intr) to gain possession of (something) by force or effort
2. to appropriate or steal to take other people's belongings
3. to receive or accept into a relationship with oneself to take a wife
4. to pay for or buy
5. to rent or lease to take a flat in town
6. to receive or obtain by regular payment we take a newspaper every day
7. to obtain by competing for; win to take first prize
8. to obtain or derive from a source he took his good manners from his older brother
9. to assume the obligations of to take office
10. to endure, esp with fortitude to take punishment
11. to adopt as a symbol of duty, obligation, etc. to take the veil
12. to receive or react to in a specified way she took the news very well
13. to adopt as one's own to take someone's part in a quarrel
14. to receive and make use of to take advice
15. to receive into the body, as by eating, inhaling, etc. to take a breath
16. to eat, drink, etc., esp habitually to take sugar in one's tea
17. to have or be engaged in for one's benefit or use to take a rest
18. to work at or study to take economics at college
19. to make, do, or perform (an action) to take a leap
20. to make use of to take an opportunity
21. to put into effect; adopt to take measures
22. (Miscellaneous Technologies / Photography) (also intr) to make a photograph of or admit of being photographed
23. (Performing Arts / Theatre) to act or perform she takes the part of the Queen
24. to write down or copy to take notes
25. to experience or feel to take pride in one's appearance to take offence
26. to consider, believe, or regard I take him to be honest
27. to consider or accept as valid I take your point
28. to hold or maintain in the mind his father took a dim view of his career
29. to deal or contend with the tennis champion took her opponent's best strokes without difficulty
30. to use as a particular case take hotels for example
31. (intr; often foll by from) to diminish or detract the actor's bad performance took from the effect of the play
32. to confront successfully the horse took the jump at the third attempt
33. (intr) to have or produce the intended effect; succeed her vaccination took the glue is taking well
34. (Life Sciences & Allied Applications / Horticulture) (intr) (of seeds, plants, etc.) to start growing successfully
35. to aim or direct he took a swipe at his opponent
36. to deal a blow to in a specified place
37. Archaic to have sexual intercourse with
38. to carry off or remove from a place
39. to carry along or have in one's possession don't forget to take your umbrella
40. to convey or transport the train will take us out of the city
41. to use as a means of transport I shall take the bus
42. to conduct or lead this road takes you to the station
43. to escort or accompany may I take you out tonight?
44. to bring or deliver to a state, position, etc. his ability took him to the forefront in his field
45. to go to look for; seek to take cover
46. to ascertain or determine by measuring, computing, etc. to take a pulse take a reading from a dial
47. (intr) (of a mechanism) to catch or engage (a part)
48. to put an end to; destroy she took her own life
49. to come upon unexpectedly; discover
50. to contract he took a chill
51. to affect or attack the fever took him one night
52. (Medicine) (copula) to become suddenly or be rendered (ill) he took sick he was taken sick
53. (also intr) to absorb or become absorbed by something to take a polish
54. (usually passive) to charm or captivate she was very taken with the puppy
55. (intr) to be or become popular; win favour
56. to require or need this job will take a lot of attention that task will take all your time
57. to subtract or deduct to take six from ten leaves four
58. to hold or contain the suitcase won't take all your clothes
59. to quote or copy he has taken several paragraphs from the book for his essay
60. to proceed to occupy to take a seat
61. (often foll by to) to use or employ to take steps to ascertain the answer
62. (Group Games / Games, other than specified) to win or capture (a trick, counter, piece, etc.)
63. (also intr) to catch as prey or catch prey
64. Slang to cheat, deceive, or victimize
take amiss to be annoyed or offended by
take at one's word See word [17]
take care to pay attention; be heedful
take care of to assume responsibility for; look after
take chances or a chance to behave in a risky manner
take five (or ten) Informal chiefly US and Canadian to take a break of five (or ten) minutes
take heart to become encouraged
take it
a. to assume; believe I take it you'll be back later
b. Informal to stand up to or endure criticism, abuse, harsh treatment, etc.
take one's time to use as much time as is needed; not rush
take place to happen or occur
take (someone's) name in vain
a. to use a name, esp of God, disrespectfully or irreverently
b. Jocular to say (someone's) name
take (something) upon oneself to assume the right to do or responsibility for (something)

Submitted by http://www.youtube.com/user/account99 on September 4, 2013 - 3:15pm

Not only are US Americans the most materialistic, they are also the most deceptively superficial and useless. USA adheres to completely different standards and backward definitions of those standards. In virtually any non westernized country, the definition of "honest work" is the production of actual tangible goods. In USA, on the other hand, the definition of work in its entirety is the act of being physically present at one's place of employment and the time spent there, whether any actual "work", even by their definition/standard, is done. In other words, US Americans literally are paid merely to exist. Stocking inventory, operating a register or even screwing around behind a computer in a big office, it's all the same deceptive crap; the act of peddling goods, that others honestly worked to produce, at criminal markup. That is mercantilism at its finest and there is reason why they carry so much negative stigma. They are liars, cheaters, stealers; outright scumbags whom leech off the honest work of others.

Some say the amount a person earns and what they own is a reflection of their work ethic, moral standing and character. But when you consider how some people, like US Americans, do things, you find it to be complete bullshit. A lie propagated by US American themselves in an attempt to present themselves in a more flattering light without actually earning it.